Guild Wars 2

Hey all, I pulled the data (again) on dusk sales for the last 2.5 days. This shows the quantity of unique buyers and sellers and dusks:

I think it may be a bit premature to start panicking.

Don’t believe everything you see, the 11k is probably real, but the other numbers simply aren’t.

It’s actually very useful, you just need to apply a little work.
Think of what you know. You know that many, many people play the content, which means you know the distribution is dense.
Knowing the general shapes of dense distributions, apply a tail to each side, but I told you I eliminated one tail.
Now you have several possible models of total wealth gain for the content that you can get pretty accurate with only the one number. The individual isn’t important for what you’re attempting to learn, only the aggregate.

Smooth Penguin.5294:

But make no mistake. If you didn’t make your Gold from the Queen’s Gauntlet, or Champion farming, you’ll be left behind in terms of wealth. That’s why it’ll be interesting to see how Anet responds to this.

This is incredibly hyperbolous. In the last week, the median player earned less than 3 gold in the new content (that’s discounting all players who earned less than 1 gold).

You can gift items from the Gemstore by clicking the present button next to the standard purchasing buttons.

The trading post is a set of offers. When you state to sell or buy something you state you’re willing to trade or buy at that price. Economically, I see no fault with the current system and how well it functions, I see no market failures and no effect on velocity of trading.

That being said, is the argument that undercutting is negative because it’s inconvenient and the value people are undercutting as a % is inconsequential?

Or is the argument that undercutting is a side effect of some other issue?

Or both or neither?

Apologies, I didn’t realize it had gotten full, I’ve repaired the issue.

If you want to PM me who you think you sent it to, I will confirm whether that is correct.

arabeth.2361:

Unrelated:
At least part of the reason threads like this spawn and are so volatile is that many people seem to only want to prove they know a lot of jargon and very few things are explained at a level that someone who isn’t a graduate in economics could understand. Certainly this isn’t John Smith’s job – although he does seem to enjoy taking time out to belittle people in threads who counter his theories – but I’ve yet to see many people explain things this complex at a level that is accessible. And of course this isn’t going to stop everyone from countering or believing their own views, but it might help. (Of course, I’m assuming that anyone cares or wishes to help, which may itself be unrealistic.)

When I originally wrote the explanation of what has happened before, I had intended it to be accessible (and at the time thought I accomplished that), but after re-reading it and your post I agree that I did not succeed.

There are a myriad of reasons why this wouldn’t work properly in our game, but on top of it all it would seriously discourage long term investments which is not something we want to do. Long run investments are lots of fun!

PS You are correct, controlled inflation is not a bad thing.

This is a great thread.

A few minor thoughts:
The TP is part of the world of Tyria and spending your time interacting with it is just as legitimate a play session as dungeons or jumping puzzles or any of our other fantastic content.

That being said, I see no evidence academically, theoretically or in practice that flipping items on the TP doesn’t push prices closer to equilibrium, eliminate dead weight loss and increase utility/surplus for the market on both the consumer and producer side.

I currently have no plans to limit players interaction with the TP in the world of Tyria in anyway. I believe it would be damaging to the economy, to the game experience and to the players overall.

That being said, if you have a dissenting opinion please discuss it here and voice your beliefs and concerns, we’re always watching and reading and learning and your input has been both intelligent and extremely valuable in the past.

edit: Edited because Juno makes a valid point.

Ensign.2189:

Conncept.7638:

And voila! Suddenly, people actually have to price things intelligently as in real world sales.

Because power traders make all kinds of money from putting items up for sale at prices where they don’t sell.

Power trading is a cash flow business. The faster your items sell the sooner you can re-invest and repeat the cycle. Power traders also become intimately familiar with the ebb and flow of prices in the markets they work in. If your item is sitting there for days on end you’re already kitten ed off from eating the 5% fee of having to re-list it on top of your money being locked up for those days.

Everything you just described would have very, very little impact on power traders (beyond volume restrictions, which would just make the bulk commodity markets a pain to work with) but would be even more punishing to the casual player that can’t keep up. You may have spun it impressively well, but there’s nothing here.

Except for the part about my feelings (I just got back from crying in a corner), everything Ensign says is correct.

Hell Avenger.7021:

1. A shock to the supply curve is a shift in the supply curve. (Making the same point here) Movement along the supply curve, is when you decrease the price of the product.

2) You trying to touch upon “Demand Curve Elasticity.” Using graphing terminology, it depends on the slope of the demand curve.

3) That Sine graph is interesting, but it lacks a demand curve. Also, dues to axis labelling, it is very confusing to read.

4) The statement is true. People trying to outbid is because price is going down, and it unlocks people from going to totally unaffordable to reasonably affordable. Think it this way, I lower Ferrari price to 40k and increase production, you will see a lot more demand. The reason is the price elasticity of the demand.

One more time:
1. “In economics, a shock is an unexpected or unpredictable event that affects an economy” This would be neither. Just because two terms are similar doesn’t mean they can be used interchangeably.

2. I’m not trying to touch on anything in particular, I’m informing you about how life works.

3. It’s not a sine curve, nor is it a supply curve, nor is it lacking a demand curve. It’s a representation of the shape of changing price over time or quantity.

4. You have a good grasp of elasticity, but I’m referring to a more complicated concept here, one that’s specifically visible in virtual economies, but present in other economies as well, depending on the state of the market.

Ensign – this is to your question as well.

We’ve seen before that at certain points in certain markets, changes to the supply side of the equation has resulted in an effect that is opposite of what was expected. We noticed that shifting the supply side equation caused the demand side of the market to shift even further. As people see the changes in the game many of them decide to enter the market. The changes to the in game content, cause a change in individual preferences. The phenomena falls off pretty quickly as you push harder on the supply side, but small changes so far have resulted in increased demand due to changing preferences. That’s why if we were to increase the input by 10 prices would drop, but if we were to increase it only slightly, prices would most likely go up.

Hell Avenger.7021:

lol… people does not study economics… Increase supply does not necessary affect demand, unless you talking about less prestige (that would actually lower demand)

Increase supply has an effect on price, lower prices. However, lower prices meet higher level demand due to affordability. You will not see people trying to outbid each other for more available products.

Anyway… this thread is just…. LOL

Btw John, this is a supply curve shock, and not a price shock. It is a movement of the whole supply curve and not movement on the curve. That graphs don’t apply.

1. It would be a shift, not a shock.

2. Shifts in supply always affect demand, just the degree with the change is relative to the individual market and the current state of the market. This is even more emphasized in a virtual economy.

3. The graph applies perfectly, though I do apologize for the confusing appearance, I just wanted to get up an idea of the shape quick and dirty.

4. “You will not see people trying to outbid each other for more available products.” this statement in not true at this point in the market, which is the point I was trying to make.

The exchange is far from a mystery, if you take what you know of how it works, and applying knowledge of MMO life cycles in both game and economy, everything you want to know becomes pretty clear.

Rebort.6295:

Increasing supply to lower the price ignores half of the supply/demand equation. What happens when the increased supply creates more demand?

This is very astute. All evidence we have shows that doubling the precursor drop rate would actually increase the price, not decrease it. The shape of the curve looks something like this (obviously ignoring any actual numbers on the graph).
http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=%28x+%2B+2x%5E2+%2B+x%5E3%2Bx%5E4+%2B+x%5E5%29+*-1

The ecto rate is fine.

When at the same price orders are FIFO

If anything changes with ectos, it will be in the update notes.

There is no bug. I don’t mean that we didn’t change anything, I mean that the numbers haven’t changed pre-post patch.

Nothing has changed with ectos.

You put up an order for 22 shards, 3 days ago.

Hello all, let’s keep in mind that this was just one change, it isn’t intended to be the one saving grace of the whole economy it was simply a market correction.

Standard: We saw that dust was too expensive and it wasn’t on a correcting trend. We made it easier and more prevalent to get dust without any major changes to the current balance.

The general philosophy is that too many large shocks to the market causes people to lose faith in that market and they slowly begin leaving due to the instability. In this case though we’re talking about relatively minor shocks pretty rarely; even that being said these changes are good for the economy overall, so a CBA weights positive.

This discussion makes no sense and we shouldn’t quibble over the semantics. Lets find something more productive to spend our thought cycles on.

As you guys see, we did identify and fix a bug. Thanks to everyone for your help identifying the issue and providing great data for me to start with in my research.

Cheers all,
good luck in the future.

Hey all, just wanted to let you know I’m still working and I’ll keep you updated as soon as I have something to post.

Just a quick update, I want to be thorough, so it will be a couple more hours before I have anything to say.

Hello everyone, I’ll look into this and get back to you.

Mystic.5934:

the amount of information necessary to make that assessment is huge.

google “gw2 cooking guide” and check the recipes. Then look at this:

I actually looked into Dill recently because of some odd behavior in the market. What I will tell you is that it is not flippers or manipulators, it is legitimate (if misguided) demand.

I’ve never heard of this happening, if you give me the names of your friends I’ll look into it.

I always recommend to people when getting into investing of any kind to define your outs before you invest. Pick numbers for profit and loss and time early and stick to them.

Please don’t switch topics in this kind of conversation, especially to another topic that’s so similar, it will confuse people.

The currency exchange gives you exactly what it shows it will give you.

You receive exactly the amount of gems or gold the exchange quotes you. There is a difference in exchange rates between the two currencies, but no additional tax from what you’re presented with when you hit the trade button.

There can only be one!……..Trading Post

Calae.1738:

John Smith.4610:

There are some really good points here, but my original intention was to talk about what the real world gets from us participating in this game economy, rather than what real world models were used in game economies.

In essence what can we learn here from the GW2 economy that we can have application outside of GW2.

An example I might think of is: Does players selling to highest buyer instead of waiting for a better offer show that people are not “Profit Maximizing” entities as basic economies assumes?

It all comes down to how people measure their time. I know some people that can’t translate time into money or money into time. It just doesn’t compute for them. Maybe they don’t care. Who knows.

This was the counterargument I was thinking when I posed the question as well.

There are some really good points here, but my original intention was to talk about what the real world gets from us participating in this game economy, rather than what real world models were used in game economies.

In essence what can we learn here from the GW2 economy that we can have application outside of GW2.

An example I might think of is: Does players selling to highest buyer instead of waiting for a better offer show that people are not “Profit Maximizing” entities as basic economies assumes?

This was a surprisingly polarizing issue, it turns out that just about half of everyone doesn’t understand why you not put in the amount you want, and the other half doesn’t understand why you wouldn’t put in the amount of you want to pay.

Valshia.7652:

Yes, both buy and sell orders are processed in FIFO order for the same offer price.

Olba.5376:

Essence Snow.3194:

John Smith.4610:

The trading post is part of Tyria, I know of no current way to earn a ban interacting with it.

So we can take that as an ok for all the trading tools as well? ex) things like zicore’s trading notifier

That’s not a valid deduction, as John’s statement is clearly about interacting within the game as a playable character, rather than interacting with the TP at all.

Olba is correct, I am referring to interacting with the TP inside the game, I don’t have any official statement to make on outside the game applications.

In another thread someone brought up the question, “what basis is there for considering the world of video game ‘economics’ has anything to do with ‘real world’ economies.” I thought it was an interesting question, can we learn more about our real world economies with more finite virtual economies?

Opening the floor.

Kraggy.4169:

John Smith.4610:

Mentioning the video game economy is mentioning that it’s a specific type of economy, not mentioning it holds less value.

The point is as I see it, what basis is there for considering the world of video game ‘economics’ has anything to do with ‘real world’ economies.

Because that’s what you continually portray yourself as being an expert in and use arguments from ‘real world’ economics, while in fact your professional life is managing an entirely artificial ‘economy’ with many constraints and attributes entirely absent from the ‘real world’ (and vice versa).

As for the issue of your “condescending tone”, as he alluded to, your replies to those who don’t profess or exhibit such expertise are often condescending rather than educational (since you often portray them by the wording and tone of your replies to them as being ignorant).

The tone your referring to is when I get frustrated with reiterating the same points. It isn’t a lack of education that upsets me, it’s stating ideas as facts without bothering to research what one is stating. Referring to things that aren’t inflation as inflation is a pet peeve of mine because it misleads people who aren’t specialists, and misinformation is something that upsets me (because of the rightfully earned stigma surrounding statistics).

That being said, that behavior is the minority here. This subforum has a plethora of really intelligent participants, debating really interesting topics all the time (this thread is a great example).

Ok, so lets split this thread up, because we’re a bit off topic. In this thread we should discuss whether gem prices should be regulated. In a new thread we should discuss different schools of economics, and lastly we should start a thread on this idea that Kraggy is speaking on, “The point is as I see it, what basis is there for considering the world of video game ‘economics’ has anything to do with ‘real world’ economies.” because I think that’s interesting.

The trading post is part of Tyria, I know of no current way to earn a ban interacting with it.

Vlad Morbius.1759:

John Smith.4610:

MRA.4758:

(Same “textbook” source as your quote.)

~MRA

I laughed at “textbook”, one for you, but I encourage you to search that textbook for whether or not that’s true; especially considering the state of the economy and a video game economy.

I for one don’t mind your input but I am not a fan of your condescending attitude and ridicule towards anyone who is not a student of economics, although you are right this is a video game you manage the economy for…so just how credible does that make you in the field of economics?

Maybe you missed the joke here? He is pointing out that I googled the copy paste inflation definition and I’m acknowledging he caught me. Then I’m telling him to look for evidence that changes in money supply don’t necessitate inflation. There is nothing condescending in this post at all.

Mentioning the video game economy is mentioning that it’s a specific type of economy, not mentioning it holds less value.

MRA.4758:

(Same “textbook” source as your quote.)

~MRA

I laughed at “textbook”, one for you, but I encourage you to search that textbook for whether or not that’s true; especially considering the state of the economy and a video game economy.

Aurisai.3416:

If this increase in the gold supply is not counteracted strongly enough with gold sinks, we have a textbook economic definition of inflation.

“In economics, inflation is a rise in the general level of prices of goods and services in an economy over a period of time”

Time for new textbooks; change in money supply is not a change in price level, they are not interchangeable.